« PreviousContinue »
The Kentish Observer says :—"The Times, in its hungry appetite for calumny against the church and churchmen, copies from an Essex paper (an Essex paper! why not a Cornish one ?) the following cool falsehoods :
“The Lay Declaration in favour of the Established Church, of which so much has been said, has been lying at a public room in Canterbury for fourteen days, and the immense number of three names are already attached to it!'
“. Dover.—The clerical petition against church reform lay in public for the signatures of the laity during several days, but not one was affixed!'”
“This is the way that a lie, once set in motion, finds ready reception through the whole circle of the radical and irreligious press. It is hardly worth while to give any formal contradiction to such palpably gross misrepresentations; but just to shew the profligate disregard of truth which marks every proceeding of the enemies of the church, we will mention, which we do upon authority, that the Dover Declaration, in the early part of the present week, had been signed by one HUNDRED AND THIRTY-Four of the most respectable inhabitants of the town, as well dissenters as churchmen."
We cannot but be pleased with the following remarks, made at a public meeting of the friends of the church, at Hull, by a Wesleyan Methodist, (Mr. Henwood,) a gentleman, we have been informed, of high respectability. They are as follows:-"So far from considering that a brighter day would never dawn upon England than that which witnesses the separation of church from the state, I am rather disposed to say, upon the calmest view I can take of the question, that it would be a day of clouds and of thick darkness; and I am sure, in the place of sunshine, it will be a time
When sheeted rain comes down
And whirlwinds howl aloud. I do sincerely believe that such a separation would only lead—I might almost say, necessarily lead—to a strife for the mastery, and then we should witness a scene of things the very opposite to that which we have now the pleasure of witnessing in our land. It confirms us in this view of the things, when most eminent men, of undoubted piety, and ardent zeal for the glory of God and the benefit of their fellow-creatures, among the dissenters, bave deprecated any such measures. They have written upon the provision by which we have been enabled to worship God, each under his own vine and under his own fig-tree, none daring to make him afraid, with feelings becoming Christians. I cannot conceive a happier state of things in any community, than that which we witness in our own happy land : a church which, from its alliance with the state, provides for the due exercise of devotion in every place throughout the land, -which provides for the proper celebration of divers important ceremonies, and gives an opportunity for most kind and friendly interchanges between the clergy and laity; whilst at the same time that the state does all that it can to ensure this regularity, it also, in the genuine spirit of liberty, allows every man who maintains the peace of the commonwealth, to exert himself in a voluntary way, to the utmost of his ability, to promote the cause of virtue and religion among us.”—Northampton Herald.
GRIEVANCES OF THE DISSENTERS. The dissenters in Lancashire have just supplied us with another choice specimen of the designs of their body, and of the “grievances” they would remove. A meeting was held at Oldham last week, principally consisting of sectarian ministers, “ to take into consideration the questions of church reform and dissenters' grievances, and to memorialize his majesty's ministers on the
above subjeets." The persons assembled were chiefly working men and shopkeepers ; and to them, amongst other equally wholesome stuff, the following spiritual food was dealt forth by their “shepherds” :-Mr. T. F. Jordan, Baptist preacher, denominated the clergymen of the church of England drunken and negligent authorities, and asked why were they compelled to pay to a church they had such good cause to hate and dislike. Mr. Fox, Independent minister, said the spirit of dissenters was now up, and they would soon throw off their winding sheet, and stop this extorting of money for a false church. There was not a shadow of a right to tithes in the whole Scriptures. Mr. Knot, a Wesleyan, and hat manufacturer, felt an utter dislike to any corporation, particularly to a corporation church. Church rates, he said, were like lurking volcanoes. Six resolutions were agreed upon ; the first of which was to the following effect :-"That this meeting deems an established religion antichristian, and inimical to true religion, and considers it their duty fully to exterminate it!!!” The thanks of the meeting were voted to the chairman; on which the latter returned thanks, saying, “ Friends, good night; and from all wrath, evil, and damnation, good Lord, deliver us ! ! !”—Northampton Herald.
LAY DECLARATION. In many, indeed in most of the agricultural districts, the Declaration has been signed without the omission of a single name, and from most of the large towns the returns have been equally gratifying. Birmingham has furnished above 12,000; Bristol, 10,000; Gloucester has reported upwards of 6000, with lists numerously signed yet to be returned; and we are no less proud, though we feel it is almost unnecessary to say, that Exeter has proved herself still worthy of the distinguished character which she has always borne for loyalty to the State, and veneration to the Protestant Church of these realms.-Exeter Western Luminary.
At a special adjourned Meeting of the Bath District Committee of the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, held on the 27th February, 1834, at Weymouth House, for taking into further consideration the resolutions passed by the Parent Society on the 10th February, and to receive the Protest directed to be drawn up by the sub-committee—the Venerable Archdeacon Moysey in the chair—the Rev. G. Baker, chairman of the sub-committee, brought up and read the Protest prepared by the direction of the last meeting. Resolved, That the Protest now read be adopted as the Protest of this Com
mittee, and be transmitted to the Parent Board. Resolved, That this Committee earnestly recommend to the consideration of
the Society the adoption of a rule which shall ensure due notice to be conveyed to every District Committee, whenever any proposition involving the fundamental and constituted principles and usages of the Society shall be brought forward ; so that no measure tending to change such principles or usages may become a law of the Society before the sentiments of such District Committees as chuse to express them shall be obtained.
W. D. Willis, Dist. Secretary.
In times like the present, when unanimity among the members of the church of England is so essential to the preservation of her interests, nothing short of
a strong sense of duty would induce the Bath District Committee to record their dissent from certain of the resolutions adopted by the Parent Board of the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, on the 10th February, 1834. Against these resolutions the Bath District Committee feel impelled to protest, for the following reasons :
According to the constitution of the Society for Promoting Christian Know, ledge, the main object which it has steadily kept in view has been the distribution, within the limits of the British empire at home and abroad, of the Bible and Liturgy, together with other religious books and tracts in accordance with the principles of the church of England; and whenever it has made special grants of books or money for special purposes, in every instance (with such very few exceptions only as tend more strongly to confirm the rule) these grants have been confined to our dominions at home, or to our colonies and dependencies abroad.
When, therefore, a measure was contemplated, involving a departure from the rule to which the Society has hitherto almost uniformly adhered, the Bath District Committee conceive that District Committees, comprising, as they do, so large a proportion of the members of the Society, and contributing so greatly to its funds, were entitled to have been consulted, or at least to have had notice of the intended proceeding more specifically given, than was afforded by an advertisement in some of the London papers, and more especially to have had announced to them the actual amount of any, and what grant of money, it was proposed to make from the funds of the Society, in furtherance of the design in view.
Under an impression that, on a point not falling within the accustomed line of the Society's operations, the Parent Board have come to a decision without having given sufficient notice of the subject matter for deliberation; and that so large a sum as 40001., subscribed to the general purposes of the Society, has been appropriated to a specific object not contemplated by the subscribers, and especially at a time when so many urgent calls upon the funds of the Society have arisen from the extension of education, and the religious wants of the people, both in the kingdoms and our colonial possessions
On these grounds the Bath District Committee very reluctantly, but at the same time under a firm conviction that they are performing a duty which they owe to the Society and to the church of England, do hereby enter their protest against the extension of the Society's operations beyond the limits of the British empire, and against the appropriation of the sum of 40001. of the funds given in trust to the Society for their general and accustomed designs.
INCORPORATED SOCIETY FOR PROMOTING THE ENLARGEMENT,
BUILDING, AND REPAIRING OF CHURCHES AND CHAPELS. Since our last Report of the proceedings of this Society, three meetings of the Board have been held—his Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury in the chair. There were present his Grace the Archbishop of York, the Bishops of London, St. Asaph, Rochester, Chichester, Hereford, Lichfield and Coventry, Bangor, Bath and Wells, Worcester, Chester, and Llandaff; Lord Kenyon; Archdeacons Cambridge and Watson; the Rev. Dr. Shepherd, Rev. Dr. Richards, Rev. H. H. Norris, Rev. T. Bowdler; the Hon. Mr. Justice Park ; Joshua Watson, Esq. ; H. J. Barchard, Esq.; J. S. Cocks, Esq.; and many others of the Committee.
Among other business transacted, grants, varying in amount according to the necessity of the case, were voted towards building a gallery in the church at Breinton, in the county of Hereford ; building a gallery in the church at Shoulden, in the county of Kent; enlarging, new-pewing, and repairing the church at Langdon Hills, in the county of Essex; building a gal
lery in the church at Swindon, in the county of Gloucester ; building a church to be called Ettingsall church, at Catchem's Corner, in the parishes of Sedgley and Wolverhampton ; repewing the church of St. Peter, Cheeshill
, in the county of Southampton; building a gallery in the church at Grandborough, in the county of Bucks; building a gallery in the church at Wivenhoe, in the county of Essex ; rebuilding the chapel at Abergorlech, in the county of Carmarthen; enlarging by rebuilding the body of the church at Bramshot, in the county of Southampton ; rebuilding the church at Garthbrengy, in the county of Brecon; building a chapel at Horrabridge, in the county of Devon; enlarging the church at Pimperne, in the county of Dorset; building a gallery and altering the pewing in the church at Catherington, in the county of Southampton; enlarging the chapel at Shidfield, in the county of Southampton ; rebuilding the church of Orcheston St. Mary, in the county of Wilts ; restoring a chapel at Ward End, near Birmingham; building a gallery and altering the pewing in the church at Tarporley, in the county of Chester ; building a church at Rhyl, in the county of Flint; building a gallery in the chapel at Astley, in the parish of Leigh and county of Lancaster ; new-pewing and repairing the church at Bodenham, in the county of Hereford ; building a church in an extra-parochial part of the city of Worcester, called the Blockhouse ; enlarging the church at Lytham, the county of Lancaster.
We learn that the late Mr. Gosling has shewn a most laudable example, by bequeathing the sum of 500l. to this valuable institution.
It is not generally known, that the Society is now enabled to accept loans of money for specific purposes. To those, therefore, who may be desirous of promoting the objects of the Society, by donations towards the building, enlargement, or improvement of churches and chapels, in any particular neigh. bourhood, it may be proper to suggest, that the Society being incorporated, can act as trustees to carry into effect the desired application of any funds entrusted to its charge.
Court of Common Pleas--Monday, Feb. 24.
TYLDEN V. KINGSLAND. MR. Sergeant Wilde and Mr. Austin appeared for the plaintiff in this case, which was an action brought to recover the balance due from the defendant to the plaintiff for tithes. Mr. Tylden is the vicar of the parish of Moldash, in Kent, near Canterbury, where the small tithes are holden under a composition. The defendant, up to Michaelmas, 1831, had paid his composition of 141. 158., and soon after the following tithe-audit paid 10l. and gave a promise to pay the remaining five guineas (including something extra for wood) on the 2d of February, 1833, a note of which was also made in the tithe-book; but this he had since refused to do.
Mr. Sergeant Andrews, for the defendant, called the maid-servant of Kingsland, who swore, that at the payment in 1831, she heard her master tell the collector that, from that time he would pay but 101., and if the plaintiff refused that, he must take his tithes in kind; a statement denied by the collector, who was called on behalf of the plaintiff. The learned sergeant also called two farmers, residing in the parish, who gave their opinion that the defendant was paying too much.
The learned judge, without calling upon Mr. Sergeant Wilde to reply, directed the jury to find for the plaintiff.
Verdict for the plaintiff accordingly.
Gray's-Inn Hall- Monday, March 3.
TYLER V. BLACK. The Lord Chief Baron, on coming into Court this morning, gave judgment in this case, which was argued in the course of last term. It was a bill filed by the plaintiffs, the Warden and Scholars of New College, Oxford, as rectors of the parish of Rumford, to establish their right to the tithes in kind of that parish, of the tithe of hay, and also to the tithes of wool, lambs, calves, &c., with the oblations, fees, &c., annexed to the chapel of Rumford ; in right of which they claimed the tithes. In support of this claim, the plaintiffs produced leases, by which they had leased out all the small tithes; and in one of them were the following words :-" Moreover, Peter Winslow grants to the said Walter, the tithe of hay for the keep of his horse"; and this was said to mean all tithe of hay, and, consequently, tithe in kind. This could not be absolutely understood; but the inference was in favour of it. The meadows in respect of which tithe in kind was claimed, were said to be described as being in the northern division. He confessed he had looked through the plan and evidence, and there was nothing to lead to this conclusion, either in the plan or evidence, except with reference to certain documents, to which he would refer. There was nothing to shew that these meadows were situated in the north in preference to the south. He should rather say, that they were partly in one way and the other. There were other leases, but they were substantially the same. There was a lease of the time of Henry V., which was relied upon, as shewing that these meadows were in the northern division. This lease was a lease of the tithe of corn and hay of the northern division, with the exception of the tithe of hay demised to the chapel of Rumford. This was the only tithe of hay demised to the chapel; it was, therefore, identified with that mentioned in the lease. The lease stated the demise of the tithe of hay of the northern division with an exception; the fair inference, therefore, was, that the exception from the northern division formed part of it. This was the argument drawn from these documents, but it was difficult to say what reliance was to be placed upon them. With the exception of these docu. ments, however, the case was extremely slight. There was stated to be a payment of 31. in lieu of tithe of hay, or as stated on the other hand, there were 240 acres of meadow land paying 3d. an acre, which amounted to the same sum. There were no means of knowing whether this payment was made subject to a modus, or whether as tithe in kind. There were in addition copies of court rolls, in which the value of the tithe was first stated; but it did not appear to him that any inference was to be drawn from the description there given. There was, lastly, an impositio post mortem, in which the value was stated to be 18d. an acre; but the inference to be drawn from this document was so vague and uncertain, that no satisfactory reliance could be placed upon the arguments upon it. There was next a parliamentary survey,-not that of 1649,—but one in which commissioners were authorized to ascertain the value of the manor, with a view to its confiscation. In this, the modus set off by the defendants was not taken notice of. It was only a part modus, and it did not appear to him that it was a necessary duty incumbent on the commissioners to make a return of this modus. What had the modus to do with the value of the manor? If they made a return of all moduses upon that part of the property belonging to the crown, that was all that could be reasonably required. The omission of this modus in the return did not, in his lordship’s opinion, operate as an argument of any weight against the existence of the modus. The case of Saunders v. Vesey was cited as a case in point, to shew that under the same circumstances as the present, the Court had decreed an account; but there the modus was of a very different description, and the only argument that could be drawn from it was this,—that if an old modus existed